Walt and Mearsheimer’s book is rightfully being criticized. A New York Times article discusses some of the issues surrounding this. I could fisk the entire article and show why their position is false, but Walt does a better job of discrediting himself than anyone else could.
Look at this excerpt from the article:
Some of the planned sites, like the Sixth & I Historic Synagogue, a cultural center in Washington, would have been host of an event if Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt appeared with opponents, said Esther Foer, the executive director.
Mr. Walt said, “Part of the game is to portray us as so extreme that we have to be balanced by someone from the ‘other side.’ †Besides, he added, when you’re promoting a book, you want to present your ideas without appearing with someone who is trying to discredit you. [Emphasis mine]
If the two men had produced a legitimate work of scholarship they wouldn’t have any problem defending their work. If there was substance, they could allow it to stand on its own merit. Instead they’re trying to use smoke and subterfuge to hide the failings of their work.
Their fear of discourse is quite telling.
Very true.
I have found that the apologists for Islamic terrorists are always afraid of any open, honest debate.